The fix is in. The BCS is controlling the ranking system to get the outcome they want which is a rematch between Bama and LSU for TV reasons. The tipoff was when Bama only dropped one spot when it lost the “Game of the Century.” If there is a Bama rematch with LSU in the BCS National Championship Game the SEC gets both teams’ $21 Mil payout. Plus that guarantees that the SEC will win a 6th BCSNC in a row. The Arkansas-LSU game will be hanky heaven as will the SECCG between LSU and UGA. I’ll leave it to you to figure out who will be getting flagged. Bama should be able to take care of Auburn without help but it will be there if the Tide needs it, too. The BCS + SEC = Symbiotic Relationship.

By my reading OSU has lost the past 8 games, but they’ve kept it close at home. Also, and interesting, HC Gundy is 0-10 (including 4 losses as QB) vs. the Sooners. Imagine the size of the monkey he is hauling around.

Oklahoma State is losing. The Hogs are not beating LSU in Baton Rouge. No way. That leaves UGA. While we just put in our best performance of the year, we haven’t come close to playing a team as good as LSU. Our defense is playing well, but LSU’s defense has been playing on this level all year with no drop offs (see Boise, SC, Vandy). I’m not saying it can’t happen, but we will be likely 8-14 point underdogs there for a reason.

I don’t think Bama’s O is nearly as good as UGA’s, Our RBs compare well with Oregon..QB and receivers are better than both. Uga has and will beat an LSU team that doesn’t match up on O.

Don’t let the NC buildup by ESPN overcome your ability to analyze the point to which this team has matured. Sure, a game with LSU will be a fight, but one we are capable of winning. Don’t let the D hype for LSU overweigh what your eyes see with UGAs D. Just because ESPN shuns Georgia and makes no comparisons doesn’t mean we can’t gauge for ourselves. Mathieu wasn’t all that good against Bama or couldn’t you see. Their overall D won that game and the tossup call on reception/strip is still reviewed on local sports shows LSU is not a juggernaught, just a good team as we are. We lead the SEC in a couple of D categories just like LSU and Bama. This team being a late comer w/o hype lets us float under the radar. Good! But don’t kid yourself, this is not a one-pony show. This D can bring it to LSUs O while we have a better O that they haven’t faced yet. Time to hype these Dawgs that were trashed three weeks ago. They have earned it.

^ This. That said we can overcome it with outstanding play to the point that it will become so obvious what the refs are trying to do that the whole rotten mess gets exposed to the nation and maybe a governmental agency gets interested in investigating. Plus, if the Dawgs beat ’em convincingly the refs won’t be able to flag ’em enough to cause a loss.

And not call it when it results in a big gainer for the other team which is exactly what the refs have been doing. Pass interference, too–no call when the receiver gets tackled and it would have been a TD for the team the refs are against (eg. this year’s Vandy-FLA game). The new thing is “helmet to helmet” which the refs can call on almost every play if they want to. These have taken the place of the bogus “celebration” call since that now is under so much scrutiny.

Not going to happen in a SEC Championship game when most eyes will be on the game itself. That will be cleanest officiated game of the season. Slive and the powers that be would be stupid to have the media question the officiating with any controversial calls.

unless they are within 5 spots of each other. Then it goes to the head to head matchup.

The problem is if LSU loses to Arky but manages to stay within the 5 team range as Alabama is already in the top 5. Then you’d still have the A beat B but B lost to C who beat A. Not sure where it goes from there.

That is what is confusing me. There doesn’t seem to be a scenario where the three teams all have the same record and are all in the top 5 of the BCS. Who goes at that point? I would think they have to default to the highest BCS ranking like it does with a two way tie.

My biggest issue with these rules is the fact they threw in the head to head if two teams are within five spots on the BCS. Why? I suppose nobody ever thought it would come down to this level of tiebreaker so nobody gave a shit when they put that one in there.

I think that is right PD. Arkansas would have to beat LSU and also jump Bama in the poll to get to go. If Bama stays above Arkansas then LSU goes. If LSU sinks below both Arkansas and Bama then Bama would go.

The tied team with the highest ranking in the Bowl Championship Series Standings following the last weekend of regular-season games shall be the divisional representative in the SEC Championship Game, unless the second of the tied teams is ranked within five-or-fewer places of the highest ranked tied team. In this case, the head-to-head results of the top two ranked tied teams shall determine the representative in the SEC Championship Game.

It says nothing about what happens if all three are within 5 spots, which is possible at this point if Arkansas beats LSU. But my point is why does it even have to be like this? The two team tiebreaker does not have the “five-or-fewer places” restriction.

Two team tiebreaker…

The tied team with the highest ranking in the Bowl Championship Series Standings following the last weekend of regular-season games shall be the divisional representative in the SEC Championship Game.

Then you run into the problem that faced OU, Texas, and Texas Tech in 2008. Texas beat OU, but lost to TTech. OU beat TTech and ended up going to the Big 12 Championship game because they were the top BCS ranked despite Texas being right below them. The SEC has the best scenario here. If LSU loses to Arkansas and then drops below them and Alabama, then Bama goes to the SECCG because it beat Arkansas who would then be the closest to them in the BCS. In no scenario should Arkansas jump Bama and be in the SECCG if they are close in rankings. It takes away the head to head which should still count.

Okie State loses. LSU loses to Georgia in the SEC title game. LSU and Bama are the highest ranked teams and neither won their conference. And there is a small, relatively unknown BCS rule that in this case only allows a conference to send a 3d team to the BCS Bowl game if the other two are ranked 1 & 2 and neither is the conference champion. Under this it is possible that Georgia would also go to the Sugar Bowl.

A more possible scenario. Okie State wins out. LSU loses to UGA. The other two highest ranked teams are Oregon and Bama. Unless UGA wins in a rout I expect LSU is not going to be ranked behind two teams they beat.

Yep … and if the “UGA beats LSU in the SECC” scenario happens, I can’t wait for the ESPN jerks to spin why it shouldn’t matter that neither Alabama nor LSU won their conference … it will be BIZARRO BCS WORLD for our Dawgs yet again.

If one half of the BCS title game is LSU, then Oregon and Bama should be out of consideration. That’s not fair to LSU who has already proven on away from Tiger Stadium that they’re better than both. “Regular season” “every game matters” etc. etc.

(I get that neither team is out of the picture, though).

Given that I’m a Georgia fan, then clearly a conference title (or, at the very least, a division title!) is understood to be required for participation. So, yeah, IF a rematch is under consideration, then Oregon has a much better argument.

I think Okie State is losing to OU. I don’t think they can handle the pressure. I’d rather see a one-loss BigXII champ OU or ACC champ Clemson/Va Tech in the game than a re-match. (And that’s saying something considering how I feel about OU and Clemson).

They may not have a D, but they only gave up 6 to Tuberville – who beat the sooners. Considering the Big 12 (minus 4, plus 2) doesn’t have a championship game this year, it really worked out well for them having Ok and OSU face off like this (almost like it was fixed that way,….hmmm). That is, if they both continue winning.

If LSU is one half of the BCS NC game, then the winner of the Ok State-OU game will be the other half. You’re right that it would not be fair to LSU that they would have to rematch a team that they already beaten on the road. People still complain about FSU/Florida in 1996 and the precedent was set in 2006 against rematches and the following year with having a conference champion jumping four spots to get into the game, which is what OU would do if they beat Ok. State.

Good troll — Yeah. Okie St. is going to get 60 scored on them by Oklahoma, and they won’t keep up. Honestly, Bama didn’t allow LSU to score a TD, while Oregon pretty much got manhandled. Like stoopnagle says, it shouldn’t be Oregon or Bama so I would put Oklahoma in it (cringe).

Okie St. is going to get 60 scored on them by Oklahoma, and they won’t keep up.

What exactly have you seen that makes you believe this? Oklahoma is down their top running back and receiver. They are thin on “defense” and allowed 41 points (at home) to a team Iowa State held to 7 and Okie State just held to 6. The Cowboys don’t have much of a defense, but I think they have enough to beat Oklahoma. Particularly since OSU’s offense is miles ahead of Oklahoma’s at this point.

I thought Herbstriet and ESPN made a decision in 07 that to play in the title game you had to be a conference champion? After all don’t they rule on all matters conserning NCAA footbal, reguardless of what Embert thinks.

As Richt painfully learned in 07′. You are not going to go to the BCS without winning your conference championship if your conference has a championship game. I don’t care to see a rematch of UO or AL if LSU wins out. And if no SEC team makes it in because Georgia wins the conference, I won’t lose any sleep that’s for sure.

I think you should have to win your conference to be in the BCS Championship game. I’m not rooting for an Alabama rematch for that reason. Plus, they already lost on their home turf. The Sugar Bowl is a tough consolation, but that’s the breaks. Georgia has been getting those breaks for the past 10 years.

If SEC West-runner up Alabama ends up in the BCS Championship Game against LSU, then I demand a retroactive 2007 National Championship. The Herbstreit Doctrine apparently states that it’s OK to play for the title if you didn’t win your conference (just like Nebraska!)… unless you’re Georgia.

IF you’re going to have a rematch (and clearly, that’s not a given), I think it’s a no-brainer for Alabama over Oregon. Alabama played LSU close. They didn’t allow a TD, held them to their lowest scoring of the season, and played in overtime.

Oregon got trucked by LSU, and there’s no real compelling reason to believe they wouldn’t again.

Now, as a Bama fan, I’m still not sure about the whole rematch thing. If there was, and Bama won, the teams are still 1-1 against each other. So, who should be champ?

It sucks that losing that game, in that fashion will likely mean no chance for a title for Alabama. If there was a playoff, it certainly wouldn’t be that way. But this is what we have for now.

That result is the clincher in the subjective arguments for me — an impressive road victory that will stick in the minds of poll voters this late in the season. (Plus, the Ducks knocked around the putative Heisman winner on his own field)
The Alabama schedule doesn’t knock me out, even though it is an SEC slate.

Well, Alabama beat Arkansas (#6), Penn State (#21), and presumably would have to beat Auburn (#24) for there to be any discussion. They also lost by 3 to LSU(#1).

Oregon beat Stanford (#9). They also lost by 13 to LSU in a game that frankly, wasn’t that close (Oregon scored the last 14 points in the game after it was out of reach). They’ve not beat anyone else in the BCS top 25, and will have a likely rematch with Arizona State in the PAC 12 title game.

I can hear arguments for Oklahoma (I guess, although that Texas Tech loss is TERRIBLE), but Oregon’s schedule makes Alabama’s seem downright murderous.

USC & ASU (which is probably more talented than Auburn). Incidentally, the discussion could be rendered moot after this weekend should USC take out the Ducks, which wouldn’t surprise me. A win wraps up the Pac-12 South for Southern Cal, although they will not be participating this year.

USC — granted in OT and controversially to boot. But like you said they had their helmets handed to them at home, in prime-time with all the Heisman hype swirling around. I am not saying that I buy into Stanford as a Top 5 team, but am providing the argument that can be used to rationalize Oregon’s inclusion in the debate for the MNC.

And, also, it is possible that people (who vote/program computer models) are becoming fatigued by SEC dominance. Then, too, there.’ is the ‘Nike effect.’

If UGA had thrashed Stanford like that, the story line would be how overrated Stanford was, rather than how good we are. Sort of like Boise State 2005. Or Hawaii 2007. If they beat us? Greatest. Team. Ever. (see West Virginia, 2005, Boise State 2011).

Sure, give Oregon another shot. I’d just like to see what crazy uniforms they could trot out for the championship game. Not Alabama, because, well, they’re Alabama. Lost at home, more recently, no sign of improvement over the season.

what would it take (besides continued wins) for UGA to move up to the title game? As long as we’re speculating on wildly improbably scenarios, lets at least try something interesting.

So, what’s your counter? That we just shouldn’t have a re-match? The logic there is that losing to a Texas Tech team that got beat 66-6 by OK State this weekend is better than losing by 3 to LSU in OT?

I’m not trying to be an ass, just trying to figure out if there’s substance here.

If your argument is that UGA’s offense is better than Alabama’s, I’d tend to agree. BUT we’ll see what they look like against LSU if UGA can hold off the upset bids from the patsies.

I don’t think UGA’s defense is in the same universe as Alabama or LSU.

See inserted comment way above.You have your ESPN hat on which means you ignore Georgia and make all kinds of excuses for other teams. Your take on UGA is dead wrong. If you can’t see a D that’s the equivalent of Bama AND LSU, then don’t speculate any more. Take your blinders off and look at individuals on Georgia’s D plus the experience of backups. It’s all good, folks.

I’m ignoring UGA for national championship talk because they’ve lost twice.

UGA’s D is 11th on Football Outsiders. It’s totally based on stats and the stats of the teams you’ve played. Kinda an RPI for D. It eliminates garbage time and is generally considered a very fair measure. The only caveat is it doesn’t include this weekend’s games.

Alabama is second to LSU on the same list. They sit at 179 and 172. The difference between Alabama and third place (Boise) is 21 points. That’s roughly the same difference between 3rd and 12th.

LSU and Alabama have D’s that are significantly better than anyone else. I’m not saying that UGA’s isn’t good – they are. They’re just not as good as Alabama’s.

Theoretically it is possible for UGA to get in the #2 spot in the BCS but literally every team above UGA would have to lose another game. I haven’t looked at all the schedules but it seems unlikely that would happen and maybe cannot happen because some of those teams play each other meaning that 1 would have to win, LSU-Arkansas for example.

if any one of three disasterous mistakes in the S Carolina game dont happen (and they did, no getting around it), and we win a shootout….or a blowout in week 2, then the rest of the season had gone exactly the same, I am guessing we would be a top 5 team now and in perfect position to jump in the BCS title game with two more regular season wins and an SECC win.

We’re a blown fake punt from being contenders. Life is a funny old dog sometimes.

“Oregon would be a conference champion and Bama would not. Better to have an out of conference rematch than to have a rematch with a team from your own conference.”

WHY???

Oregon has played a weaker schedule and was annihilated by LSU (seriously, look it up – LSU was up 27 to start the 4th and let the air out of the ball).

Arkansas is better than any team Oregon has beaten. Penn State is probably as good as most teams Oregon has beaten. Clearly, when we start comparing third and forth best wins, Alabama is going to win in a wash.

So, why is it better that a “conference champion” plays again? I’ve had this argument offline already today, and I frankly just don’t get it. By the benefit of geography Oregon gets a rematch, but Alabama doesn’t?

Well if geography has you in such a snit, Alabama good jump to the Big East. I think they could win thaty conference every year and you get your BCS bid.

Its not about georgraphy. It is about winning your conference or at least your division. It sucks , but you lost to LSU just like it sucked for us that we lost to Tenn on 07 and Sc this year and it sucked for Mich that they lost to Ohio State.

To tell you the truth, Oregon’s defense didn’t look exactly stout against Stanford, but Stanford’s looked even worse. That game could have gone into the 50s for each team, except for turnovers. I don’t think either team has an SEC-caliber defense, which I think you may need to win a national championship. I’m also not too excited about a rematch between LSU and Alabama for a title game. I guess I’ll be hoping Okla. State and LSU win out. If EVERYBODY has 1 loss, though, woah…

Obviously we still need to beat uk and tech which is far from a given and the sec west champ will and should be favored but…..does anybody else notice that if we had simply taken care of the football against usc we would have a path to the national title?

Well, actually the mistake was booking a game as the opener against a top-5 team when we were coming off a 6-7 season. If we play a walkover team in the first game of the season UGA is 9-1 even with the loss to South Carolina and right in the mix for going to the BCSNCG if the Dawgs win out.

Yeah which is why I think those rumors about the disagreements between Richt and McGarrity were true in the beginning. I don’t think Coach Richt wanted that game against Boise St. Maybe next year he would have, but not this year given that his team was so young going into the season.

Which leads to the obvious question: By taking the Boise game was McGarity trying to set up CMR to get rid of him at the end of the season? Even after the Florida game McGarity was making noises about “waiting until the season was over” to make a decision on CMR and at that point UGA had won 6 in a row and beaten Florida.

I’m not generally in favor of rematches. Hey, we had our chance.
But on the other hand, it’s not that simple. Oregon did get manhandled by LSU. Ok State would have lost to OU that lost to Texas Tech. I think our loss looks better.
However, that assumes LSU wins out. I still think Arkansas will beat them.
Yes, UGA, you should be kicking yourselves for the USC debacle. You could be in the debate now, too.

This. Also, I agree with the fact that it’s unfortunate the SEC is so loaded and Bama is probably better than most other conference champs. Unfortunately, I don’t see how you can proclaim to be the best team in the country if you weren’t the best in your conference. As much as I hated it, I don’t think we had much of an argument in 2007. We didn’t take care of business when we had the opportunity, much like Bama in 2011 did not.

I think the whole “didn’t win your division” argument is bunk. I thought it was bunk in 2007. I’ll think it’s bunk every year even if it keeps Auburn out of the national title game (which we can all agree is a desired outcome).

I am WAY more sympathetic to the no rematches argument. Like I said in my original post, even if Alabama were to beat LSU, they’d still only be 1-1 versus them this year.

But to say Oregon deserves it more because they beat up on the exceptionally weak PAC 12 is just hooey.

Why should LSU have to beat Bama twice to win it (if LSU wins the SEC, I mean)?

If that happens, give someone else a shot. Many people outside of the SEC thought that Michigan and Ohio State deserved a rematch in 06 because the game was so close. ESPN argued that someone else should get a shot and Florida ran OSU out of the stadium. Someone else should get a shot.

I agree with you about Oregon and that’s one of my big probelms with a playoff. One proposed way to combat bracket creep is to limit the field to just conf champs. This makes sense on the surface until to consider not all conferences are created equal. Unfortunately, the ACC champ, for example, is rarely a better team than the second best SEC team. So why do they get in the tournament to determine the best team. If you include ACC Champ, you must included SEC 2nd place. And thus bracket creep begins!

Ell, if LSU beats Arky, and then UGA beats unanimous #1 LSU, who should represent the SEC, and why…? Just curious your thoughts.

That’s a great question. Really excellent. There are 2 different questions there really – should and would.

UGA WOULD get an automatic bid and play in the Sugar Bowl. Barring Armageddon everywhere else, a 2 loss UGA team doesn’t get into the championship game.

I’d bet Alabama would have a great shot at it. They’re the only 1 loss team in the best conference, and their lone loss is by 3 points in a game that literally turned on 4 missed FGs and an interception that could have been called either a pick or a first and goal at the one and there’s no way the replay official changes the call.

I think that Alabama is so dangerously close to winning that game and being undefeated gives them the BCS berth.

Now, if we talk about should, then it certainly gets a ton more complicated. My bottom line is this: an SEC team should play for the title. The three teams at the top of the west and UGA are better than any other conference champ – with the possible exception of OK State.

Obviously, my preference would be that Alabama be that team. But I could certainly hear an argument for LSU as well. It gets just really damn complicated.

That’s when I jump off the “this is more fun to talk about and dissect” bandwagon and jump on the “just have a damn playoff” bandwagon. Someone inevitably gets screwed; LSU goes to the Capitol One Bowl and beats Penn State by 40, Alabama beats Oklahoma (or somebody equally good) in the Cotton Bowl by 40, and Ok State loses to Oregon 95-90 in a BCS game that no one really thinks has the best 2 teams.

That is a fair (if not partial… :)) answer. But it begs the question, what should be the criteria for getting into the BCSNCG? Is it the team with the best resume? Is it the hottest team? Under the hypothetical on the table, UGA would undoubtedly be riding the largest wave of momentum. And UGA would have done something away from home that Bama was unable to do at home: beat LSU. Granted, we’d have two losses to yours and LSU’s one, but would there be any real seperation in the three? I’d say tie goes to the conf champion.

As to your comment about somebody being screwed, that’s what makes all this so great, in my opinion. EVERYBODY in the discussion would have or already has screwed themselves. If there’s a playoff, LSU/Bama isn’t what it was. Despite losing, you’ll probably agree that was as close to a Super Bowl atmosphere as you’re going to get. Winner stays alive loser likely goes home. I’ve been to Tuscaloosa. I know how nutty you people are. 🙂 That’s what differentiates college football from every other sport out there.

I really do feel for you guys about the 2007 stuff. That team just jelled a little late, or could have been really exceptionally special. And, FWIW, UGA is one of the handful of teams I do always root for when they’re not playing Bama. I’ve always had a special place in my heart for you Hairy Dawgs.

The first tiebreaker is number of losses. I don’t see how it can’t be. I mean, you guys played BSU, but Bama played PSU – and a MUCH tougher conference schedule (UGA has avoided the big 3 in the west and that’s huge).

My years of watching this crap tells me it doesn’t matter that LSU beat Alabama, LSU lost AFTER Alabama, so Alabama would jump them and be in place to play for the BCS.

The whole round-robin loss thing makes me nuts. To me, the real insanity comes if Arkansas beats LSU. Then, it all gets real strange. And someone has a real gripe: whoever beat the West team that goes.

I do agree that a playoff would decrease the excitement about those huge regular season matchups. And LSU was incredible here. I’ve been to a couple of national title games, and the atmosphere wasn’t any less insane. Just awesome.

I think that the Death to the BCS plan preserves a lot of that (home field advantage is HUGE in those games, despite what happened here a few weeks ago).

There’s no perfect solution, but I think a playoff gets us to the “fairest” champion. But hell, even in an absolute playoff, if Bama beats LSU, they’re still 1-1… so yeah, it’s obviously complicated.

UGA needs Arkansas to beat LSU then UGA needs to beat whomever the West Champion is in the SECCG, probably Bama at that point. At least UGA would be SEC Champion and the last 5 SEC Champions (one with 2 losses) played in the BCSNCG. Then several other teams need to lose for UGA to even have a chance.

I guess I don’t understand the reaction “UGA got boned by this specific hardline interpretation to a non-rule” being “that non-rule should be in place forever”.

I cannot fathom for the life of me why, when you evaluate two teams, side-by-side, one would prefer Oregon to Alabama. Common opponents – check, but Alabama handled it immeasurably better. Strength of schedule is tilted way in the Tide’s favor.

So, let me re-phrase the question. In a world where Boise wins last weekend and is undefeated – would you prefer Boise to any non-undefeated conference champ?

Yep, but ESPN can kick up the angst we have suffered under for years. They have made an EFFORT to not give UGA any hype going back to preStafford/Moreno. They wouldn’t even interview Richt after big wins 10 years ago. They eschewed his wearing his religion on his sleeve.

There is something anti-UGA going on at ESPN and there has been for quite some time. It could be as simple as all the people that work there from rival teams such as Holtz, Jesse Palmer, Mark May (who played for Pitt when UGA seemed to play Pitt almost every year) Charles Davis of UT and others, but I suspect something more sinister. I think there is someone high up at ESPN on the business side who has had it in for the Dawgs for years. Who? I do not know. But if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck–it’s a duck. Too much negative stuff directed against UGA has come out of the WWL over the years for it to just be a coincidence. When was the last time you saw any sports network CAMPAIGN against a team playing in the BCSNCG like the ESPN talking heads did against Georgia in 2007? Never–before or since.

@Cojones, there’s just no basis for that comment. I loathe the Weasels as much as the next Dawg for 2007 and the aforementioned Herbstreit Doctrine (which should be considered for lexicon status, I think), but Tim Tebow is a perfect argument against this line of thinking. They couldn’t talk enough about that guy… or have you forgotten? And, if so, what brand of brainwipe did you use?

The basis for the comment is 9-10 yrs old. My Rick Perry block won’t allow the names that knocked Richt for that at that time , but certainly Jim Rome’s name comes to mind. They tied it in with Bowdin at the time. “Reverend Richt” was used as a slur and exact words were said and or printed relating to him wearing his religion on his sleeve. The fear was that he would use it as a recruiting weapon. The first three years of Richt’s tenure were rife with innuendo and outright comments about him thanking”My Lord Jesus Christ” for his wins. That’s pretty imprecise documentation, but that’s where the remark came from.

No, there’s no “conspiracy” per se. What there is, is inconsistency on the part of the BCS and its cheerleader, the WWL, and if you’re inconsistent on building the foundation of a “national championship,” what credibility is there?

There’s ABSOLUTELY NO motivation for the folks who run the computer polls to put themselves at risk is my point. They don’t make any money off the BCS or the polls themselves even.

It’s not about virtue, it’s about competence and spread. You’re implying that the BCS would pay off independent computer pollsters to generate numbers that would possibly give them the matchup they want. And they have to do this subtly or someone will point out that the numbers are odd.

Ostensibly they’d do this to goose ratings – by a handful of points. Well, the broadcast rights are already sold, so they’d be doing this to possibly increase how much the rights are worth down the road? Because let’s be honest – by in large, the folks in Birmingham/Tuscaloosa/Baton Rouge/New Orleans are going to watch the BCS championship game NO MATTER WHAT.

So yes, I think it strains credibility to imply that there’s a vast conspiracy between the BCS and the computer pollsters.

Not implying that there are vested interests or orchestrated schemes at play. But a theme or script can be introduced by certain media outlets that happen to own the rights to conference games. Once the germ is introduced, and humans acting only as humans can, voters may pile on the most ‘convenient’ set of circumstances. The convenience is that because they have a ‘vote’ and a say in the process that selects the MNC participants the voters/reporters can also thrive on the possible controversy that their votes create.

I would need more time to imagine a scenario weaving in computer polling collusion.

What in Hell are you saying? You don’t think that those TV suits wouldn’t kill their own mothers for a single rating point increase? And those guys control the polls. I know first hand about how ruthless TV is. Every week it’s dog eat dog, no pun intended. At least I have never been asked by any of those important business guys to compromise my virtue with any of that “casting couch” business…wait…ah… what….?

Ok let’s say OKIE ST wins out and LSU loses to UGA (Yeah) in the SEC Championship game. Who plays OSU? I think AL would have a good case here to play over Oregon St. Or would a one loss LSU still make it? Is losing the Championship game worse than losing a regular season game?

We can all agree there should be a representative of the SEC in the BCSNCG. There is little debate about that, even outside the SEC. If LSU is better than Bama, which they proved on the field, and UGA is better than LSU (having proved it on the field, hypothetically), why not UGA, despite on emore loss? Yes, we slipped bad out of the gate, but would there be any doubt at that point we are one of the best teams in the country? And we’d be the SEC champ… I don’t know. I don’t think that’ll fly nationally, but I think we’d have just as good if not better argument than LSU and Bama, under the situation. For all the arguments against us in 2007, we should get benefit of the doubt in the opposite direction in 2011. Anybody here think Les Miles would lobby for us under those circumstance like he did for conference champ LSU in 2007?

Unfortunately, I do not think there is. But, let’s say we go in and beat LSU 24-10 or something like that. I’m not predicting that, but it’s possible I suppose. Remember 2005. If we did something like that, beating the unanimous # 1 team in the country, I think we’d warrant serious consideration.

Agreed (incredibly, really, given the consistent yet unspectacular way this season has developed). Though so many dominoes have to fall exactly that focusing on Kentucky is more of where I am headed at the moment.

I like the young pup WRs vs. Willie Mart. That is kinda intriguing to consider.

But the Beavers taking out Oregon on the road would be on the order of Pitt (+29) beating WVU, 13-9, or Stanford (+41) taking out USC, 24-23, in 2007. The greatness of the college game is that it has happened before and will happen again.

And, just like 2007, UGa may be reflecting darkly on the early season fiasco against the Cocks.

None of those 1 loss team would be SEC champs and have just beaten the #1 team in the country. if that isn’t good for a bump, I dont know what is. If LSU can go from 7 to 2 with 2 losses with a close win over a questionable Tennessee team, surely the Dawgs get a little bump after throttling the #1 team in the country….might as well dream big.

And to think there is anybody on this planet who wants a playoff?!? You would have lost all this discussion and all these “angles” of who will play who and who deserves it and who doesn’t….you gotta be kidding me…who wants to loose all this debate and discussion b/c now you have an NFL playoff in which teams mail-in their last few games to “gear-up” for the playoffs. (Just to clairify – I am NOT being sarcastic).

I’ve got a kernel of a thought here so bear with me. The Dawgs win out and upset,and yes it would be a huge upset, LSU. By every permutation I can come up with it means we have some strange BCSCG like OK/Oregon than every pundit on ESPN screams for a play-off because we all know the SEC teams are better but as always beat each other up. The screaming reaches a level where the NCAA and ESPN can’t and don’t want to ignore it. We than end up with a playoff and it actually will be ….wait for it……Bobo’s fault for winning the the SEC crown when we were not suppose to. It took a little but it is Bobo’s fault.

I just assume the Senator needed to refill his Scrooge McDuck style money bin with all these google adword dollars and threw out some red meat for the masses…I mean dawgs can be all “what-if” with stars in their eyes, bammers can talk about could’ves and the playoff people can chime in with a playoff takes proves it on the field.

I think the answer to that question is easy – who would Les rather play? The team that had to shoot itself in the (kicker’s) foot to lose, or the team that you ran out of the stadium without Jefferson or Shepard in pads?

LSU ran clock the entire second half. Whoo, can’t wait to see that one again.

I’m not sure any of this matters, really, if LSU wins out. If they do, I suspect the winner of OK-Ok St is a shoe in. In the one loss sweepstakes, Oregon will be eliminated based on their loss to LSU and Bama will be eliminated based on them not winning the conf championship. I’m not saying any of this is fair, but it is probably what will happen.

Quote Of The Day

“But outside of that, the biggest advantage you can have is have good leadership, have a veteran football team, and when you’ve got that, it doesn’t matter whether you have spring practice or not. When you don’t have that, it’s tougher, when you don’t have leadership and you don’t have the experience at certain positions.”— Kirby Smart, Dawgs247, 3/31/20